tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post2460257197208404289..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: Interesting Posts and Articles #205joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-22849463487930373792009-09-03T12:32:41.419-04:002009-09-03T12:32:41.419-04:00Josh, I agree with your point, it just strikes me ...Josh, I agree with your point, it just strikes me that the suggestion of evolutionists is almost more unbelievable than that of the I.D. people...all of the subcomponents just happened to be there for other reasons and - lo and behold - they formed an irreducibly complex system that performs a totally different function highly effectively...<br /><br />Not saying this argument is a disproof, just that I am very wary of the "evidence" procured by both sides of the debate.Rabbi Joshua Maroofhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12585369620887846940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-67486826958366959402009-09-03T12:18:02.787-04:002009-09-03T12:18:02.787-04:00personally, i don't see this as proof of evolu...personally, i don't see this as proof of evolution, but it does seem to be somewhat good disproof of an argument against.<br /><br />as you write, "The I.D. people maintain that the final, complex system is irreducible in the sense that multiple factors have to conspire simultaneously."<br /><br />the reason for this is that there is no purpose to the intermediate stages or subcomponents, and so natural selection would not encourage the preservation of these useless intermediate stages. but sometimes, these intermediate stages can be shown to exist, or else that they *could* have existed, albeit serving an entirely different function. an example of intermediate stages or subcomponents serving entirely different purposes is the flagellum of bacteria. ID folks said it was irreducibly complex, but theorists showed how steps towards this final complicated mechanism actually could, in potential, have served a different function; and that therefore, the mechanisms of natural selection would work to preserve it. and then, at a later stage, these features change more, or different existing subcomponents suddenly work better together.<br /><br />the "problem" with ID is that they raise some question or difficulty, then throw up their hands and say "it must have been God!" but this might simply be due to a paucity of imagination or our intellect or knowledge, rather than a real insurmountable problem.<br /><br />and this i think is the same motivating factor for so-called vestigial organs.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-59839903274093107082009-09-03T12:13:55.429-04:002009-09-03T12:13:55.429-04:00Though I don't think intelligent design can be...Though I don't think intelligent design can be called science.Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-85566242693508933212009-09-03T12:06:03.208-04:002009-09-03T12:06:03.208-04:00I agree with R. Maroof,
These new evolutionist ev...I agree with R. Maroof,<br /><br />These new evolutionist evidences of late are rather unconvincing, almost as bad as the young earth creationists. They're over doing it.Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-71702183316039905662009-09-02T22:12:29.205-04:002009-09-02T22:12:29.205-04:00I am not so sure that the "refutation" o...I am not so sure that the "refutation" of the irreducible complexity concept is so compelling. The I.D. people maintain that the final, complex system is irreducible in the sense that multiple factors have to conspire simultaneously to effectuate its function and that it cannot be seen as having developed in a gradual piecemeal way. This doesn't preclude the possibility, as far as I understand, that that the building blocks might exist in some other form outside the system in question. <br /><br />I find both sides of the evolution debate straining my credulity in their own ways and happily touting only the evidence that supports their respective cases while ignoring counterpoints and/or deliberately misunderstanding or glossing over the nuances of counterarguments.Rabbi Joshua Maroofhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12585369620887846940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-60378855896253978682009-09-02T18:49:17.401-04:002009-09-02T18:49:17.401-04:00That is one heck of an extrapolation! Who knew, a...That is one heck of an extrapolation! Who knew, a seminary made up of war captives.Orthonomicshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07892074485262548496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-2019554228531076582009-09-02T17:56:41.671-04:002009-09-02T17:56:41.671-04:00"Thus, while she might be pretty before, it i..."Thus, while she might be pretty before, it is a mitvah to make her look ugly before her wedding day. They probably just extrapolated from the Eshes Yefas Toar to the general case..."<br /><br />Josh, I think this is the first time your blog has actually made me laugh :-)<br /><br />Yasher KoachZBnoreply@blogger.com